2016 RTE Drama: Rebellion - no spoilers please (mod warning in post #1)

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Do you know what I'd love to see done?

A what if the British hadn't executed the leaders version of Ireland but maybe set in the present day, or even the 50's.

I know TV3 are doing the what if they were put on trial aspect but I doubt they'll go too far beyond a trial.

Leaders aren't executed, tide of opinion doesn't shift towards the rebels. War of Independence isn't supported, Bloody Sunday (Croke Park) doesn't happen, maybe no treaty, maybe different terms?

Maybe the British realise they have to change how they deal with Ireland. Maybe they crack down, maybe they ease up. Maybe home rule followed by civil war. Maybe everything that happened in Northern Ireland still happens but with the roles reversed? Catholic nationalists oppress Protestant Unionists, Ian Paisley is organising Civil Rights marches instead of forming opposition to them.

Maybe we just slowly become British and end up having a Scottish style referendum in 2014 to decide if we want to leave the Union or not. We panick about what currency we'll use if we do leave the union and end up staying in it.

Yeah... I want to see that program.

Strazdas

Shurimgreat wrote: »

So you want a hagiography of the Rising and the leaders?

We are in Ireland here, not Russia. The writers are free to give any view they want, and in particular free to give a nuanced view of it.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't share your idyllic view of the Rising. Some are more balanced in their assessment.

The Rising leaders, while noble in their aspirations, were foolish in their method of execution. It was all a big PR stunt and in truth they ultimately won the PR battle but at the cost of hundreds of innocent lives. There wasn't a hope in hell of securing liberty for Ireland the way they acted.

The only thing that turned it in their favour was their own execution, creating martyrs out of them. The British hardly covered themselves in glory here too.

Altogether an unbiased view of it was the Rising was anarchic, poorly executed and both the rebels and British made a lot of silly mistakes. Rebellion pretty much captures this well, which is something ultra nationalists like yourself can't accept.

Good point. In a drama series with fictional characters, it's perfectly okay for the writers to pursue whatever angle they choose, there is no obligation on them to take any particular stance : it's not a documentary about the Rising.

And in their defence, they have tried hard to maintain a balance, showing both the Rebels and the British forces behaving badly at times.

jmcc

Shurimgreat wrote: »

So you want a hagiography of the Rising and the leaders?

No. I would prefer a drama that didn't waste all that money on RTE's own Down Town Abbey.

We are in Ireland here, not Russia. The writers are free to give any view they want, and in particular free to give a nuanced view of it.

And just what would you know about the freedom of the press in Ireland? To people like you, they are empty and meaningless words to be spouted when trying to establish your hipsterness. Ireland did not have a free press and a democracy needs a free press. But then that's probably too complex a topic for such a thread as this. Bad writing is bad writing and that's the central issue with Down Town Abbey.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't share your idyllic view of the Rising. Some are more balanced in their assessment.

Now you probably spent most of the afternoon feverishly trying to craft that little sentence but you made one mistake. You haven't a clue about what I think of the Rising. To put it in simple terms for you, I think it was a clusterf*ck.

Altogether an unbiased view of it was the Rising was anarchic, poorly executed and both the rebels and British made a lot of silly mistakes. Rebellion pretty much captures this well, which is something ultra nationalists like yourself can't accept.

Down Town Abbey does not capture this well.

Regards...jmcc

mick malones mauser

Wow

Unbelievable amount of post colonial self loathing going on here.

We should never have left the empire,(wipes a manly tear from his eye,salutes old Major General Wing Commander Myers) and locks himself in the drawing room with a bottle of Scotch (none of that Irish muck) and his old webley revolver ,hums "there'll always be an Engand",sips scotch,raises revolver to forehead.....

Now that's drama...and no bloody gleesons in it either.

mick malones mauser

Wow

Unbelievable amount of post colonial self loathing going on here.

We should never have left the empire,(wipes a manly tear from his eye,salutes old Major General Wing Commander Myers) and locks himself in the drawing room with a bottle of Scotch (none of that Irish muck) and his old webley revolver ,hums "there'll always be an Engand",sips scotch,raises revolver to forehead.....

Now that's drama...and no bloody gleesons in it either.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

mick malones mauser wrote: »

Wow

Unbelievable amount of post colonial self loathing going on here.

We should never have left the empire,(wipes a manly tear from his eye,salutes old Major General Wing Commander Myers) and locks himself in the drawing room with a bottle of Scotch (none of that Irish muck) and his old webley revolver ,hums "there'll always be an Engand",sips scotch,raises revolver to forehead.....

Now that's drama...and no bloody gleesons in it either.

There's been more Gleeson's in your posts than there have ever been on RTÉ.

mick malones mauser

One should never lose ones sense of humour Elmo

Strazdas

mick malones mauser wrote: »

Wow

Unbelievable amount of post colonial self loathing going on here.

We should never have left the empire,(wipes a manly tear from his eye,salutes old Major General Wing Commander Myers) and locks himself in the drawing room with a bottle of Scotch (none of that Irish muck) and his old webley revolver ,hums "there'll always be an Engand",sips scotch,raises revolver to forehead.....

Now that's drama...and no bloody gleesons in it either.

Well there's an alternate viewpoint that says that Ireland could have become an independent Republic even without the Rising and the War of Independence. It would have meant a different time scale but Irish nationalism was on the rise and I don't think we would ever have settled for being a Scotland or Wales and remaining fully within the UK.

jmcc

Strazdas wrote: »

Well there's an alternate viewpoint that says that Ireland could have become an independent Republic even without the Rising and the War of Independence. It would have meant a different time scale but Irish nationalism was on the rise and I don't think we would ever have settled for being a Scotland or Wales and remaining fully within the UK.

It is rubbish spouted by the Unionist John Bruton. Bruton, much like some of the posters here would wish that Ireland was still part of the United Kingdom. Have you figured out which Geneva Convention forbids assassination in war yet?

From the way that Down Town Abbey turned out, one would be forgiven for thinking that RTE was just a regional BBC station.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Do you know what I'd love to see done?

A what if the British hadn't executed the leaders version of Ireland but maybe set in the present day, or even the 50's.

Good counterfactual or alternative history is based on fact and how events might have evolved if key elements were slightly different. It rarely results in a Mills and Boon version of history (as your version would because it excludes the Conscription Crisis and the growing casualty lists of Irish soldiers in WW1, and the First and Second World Wars).

The Trial format is a well established one and has been done on many other TV stations (Lee Harvey Oswald, Custer etc.)

Regards...jmcc

Strazdas

jmcc wrote: »

It is rubbish spouted by the Unionist John Bruton. Bruton, much like some of the posters here would wish that Ireland was still part of the United Kingdom. Have you figured out which Geneva Convention forbids assassination in war yet?

From the way that Down Town Abbey turned out, one would be forgiven for thinking that RTE was just a regional BBC station.

Regards...jmcc

How could they have ultimately prevented Ireland from leaving the Union? Cyprus became an independent Republic in 1960 and Malta in 1964.

jmcc

Strazdas wrote: »

How could they have ultimately prevented Ireland from leaving the Union? Cyprus became an independent Republic in 1960 and Malta in 1964.

Irish independence facilitated all that more because it showed that it was possible to leave your beloved Empire.

Regards...jmcc

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

jmcc wrote: »

Good counterfactual or alternative history is based on fact and how events might have evolved if key elements were slightly different. It rarely results in a Mills and Boon version of history (as your version would because it excludes the Conscription Crisis and the growing casualty lists of Irish soldiers in WW1, and the First and Second World Wars).

"My version" doesn't exclude anything because it doesn't exist. I was throwing out some hypothetical ideas not giving a full and exact summary of what would have happened.

You should read the things you reply to more carefully. Perhaps the view from your high horse isn't great.

P.S. Not sure how any of what I did say amounts to Mills & Boon either.

Mr E

History & Heritage.

I'm just going to start deleting historical discussion from now on (so bear that in mind before you get stuck into writing a long reply - you'll be wasting your time).

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

So.... predictions for the last episode?

Everyone lives? Everyone dies? Everyone gets deported to Australia?

The Rape of Lucretia

May takes the boat to England, finding her salvation there, giving away the sprog, marries a nice man called Geoffrey, cuts out the nonsense of being a woman with a job, and becomes more English than the English themselves. She rarely mentions her Irish background, even throwing off the Cork accent.

Frances gives up all her fantasies of feminism and republicanism, showing deep cowardice, denying her part in the violence, dobs in a few men to get herself off the hook, and when things get going again in the Terrorism of Independence, takes the boat to England where she becomes a nurse, never marries, and dies of old age and very bitter at the age of 43, wracked by the guilt of her cold hearted murderer and cowardly self.

Eliza, is rescued by her father and family contacts and pull, puts it all behind her, quits the medical training and marries a Guinness (her brother cant believe his good fortune but drowns drunk in a gutter one night). She moves between London and Dublin society, has 3 great children and a long and happy life, only in her old age telling stories of her days as a rebel which are only half believed by listeners.

Some of Ireland became a half baked independent state, very poor at running its affairs, always comparing itself to England, doing most its trade with England, millions of its citizens living and/or earning their livings in England, and maintaining open borders with England. The rest of Ireland still doesnt know what the outcome is.

TCDStudent1

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

So.... predictions for the last episode?

Everyone lives? Everyone dies? Everyone gets deported to Australia?

Well the rising ended in the last episode, so its hard to see how anybody might die now. Art is the only 1 still in a war and my take on last week is that his story is over now (for this series anyway).

Be nice to see a scene at Frongoch. Maybe Jimmy gets sent there and that will be the end of his story.

The trailer for next week shows May & Frances hiding from the police so its difficult to know how they will escape that, other than to flee the country.

Strangely enough, the 1 character I am most curious about is Minnie. I am looking forward to seeing if Harry gets away with his scheme and if Minnie suffers.

Interestingly enough, I saw in next weeks trailer that De Valera is going to be there. In the scene from the trailer, you see Jimmy complaining to De Valera for not sending back up. De Valera has been portrayed very cowardly in this series. I'm no fan of his but I wonder if a film / TV series will ever try to portray him in a positive light. "Michael Collins" & "The Treaty" both put him in a villainous role too.

Strazdas

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

So.... predictions for the last episode?

Everyone lives? Everyone dies? Everyone gets deported to Australia?

I suspect everyone must survive given that the Rising is now over. I can't see Jimmy being executed as he is not a Rebel leader. I would assume that Arthur survives too now that we know there will be a second series. His return to a chaotic post-War and rapidly changing Ireland would surely be interesting to watch.

TCDStudent1

When Rebellion was coming out, I remember it being talked about as showing the rising from the point of view from ordinary people who were involved in it.
I watched some of Strumpet City earlier today and I think Strumpet City probably nailed the "ordinary person viewpoint" much better than Rebellion did. It just seems to get the grittiness of Dublin down better. Even the way the characters talk, it just seems too polished. Thats ok for Elizabeth. I like Ruth Bradley's accent but again it seems too glossy. Also, Sarah Greene's scene Mrs. Hammond where she says something like "The seed is good in fertile soil, it would seem that I have given him what you could not" was just too perfect, looked too rehearsed. Imagine that scene in real life - I doubt that the people would be so calm and talking so perfectly.

P. Breathnach

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

May takes the boat to England, finding her salvation there, giving away the sprog, marries a nice man called Geoffrey, cuts out the nonsense of being a woman with a job, and becomes more English than the English themselves. She rarely mentions her Irish background, even throwing off the Cork accent.

Frances gives up all her fantasies of feminism and republicanism, showing deep cowardice, denying her part in the violence, dobs in a few men to get herself off the hook, and when things get going again in the Terrorism of Independence, takes the boat to England where she becomes a nurse, never marries, and dies of old age and very bitter at the age of 43, wracked by the guilt of her cold hearted murderer and cowardly self.

Eliza, is rescued by her father and family contacts and pull, puts it all behind her, quits the medical training and marries a Guinness (her brother cant believe his good fortune but drowns drunk in a gutter one night). She moves between London and Dublin society, has 3 great children and a long and happy life, only in her old age telling stories of her days as a rebel which are only half believed by listeners.

Some of Ireland became a half baked independent state, very poor at running its affairs, always comparing itself to England, doing most its trade with England, millions of its citizens living and/or earning their livings in England, and maintaining open borders with England. The rest of Ireland still doesnt know what the outcome is.

You should have been hired as a script consultant.

Strazdas

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

When Rebellion was coming out, I remember it being talked about as showing the rising from the point of view from ordinary people who were involved in it.
I watched some of Strumpet City earlier today and I think Strumpet City probably nailed the "ordinary person viewpoint" much better than Rebellion did. It just seems to get the grittiness of Dublin down better. Even the way the characters talk, it just seems too polished. Thats ok for Elizabeth. I like Ruth Bradley's accent but again it seems too glossy. Also, Sarah Greene's scene Mrs. Hammond where she says something like "The seed is good in fertile soil, it would seem that I have given him what you could not" was just too perfect, looked too rehearsed. Imagine that scene in real life - I doubt it the people would be so calm and talking so perfectly.

Those are probably valid points but Strumpet City was able to concentrate mainly on characterisation. Ironically it was probably more soap opera like than Rebellion, the very thing that people have been criticising the latter for. Rebellion have had to factor in numerous scenes of the actual Rising into every episode which has hampered their characterisation somewhat. I do agree that some of the dialogue has been jarring : Frances using the F word to May for example, and other 21st century phrases and expressions creeping in.

P. Breathnach

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

When Rebellion was coming out, I remember it being talked about as showing the rising from the point of view from ordinary people who were involved in it.
I watched some of Strumpet City earlier today and I think Strumpet City probably nailed the "ordinary person viewpoint" much better than Rebellion did. It just seems to get the grittiness of Dublin down better. Even the way the characters talk, it just seems too polished. Thats ok for Elizabeth. I like Ruth Bradley's accent but again it seems too glossy. Also, Sarah Greene's scene Mrs. Hammond where she says something like "The seed is good in fertile soil, it would seem that I have given him what you could not" was just too perfect, looked too rehearsed. Imagine that scene in real life - I doubt it the people would be so calm and talking so perfectly.

Well, it had several advantages over Rebellion, most notably that the book was the result of years of research and writing by James Plunkett, a man who really had his finger on Dublin's pulse (particularly on the Trade Union movement and its history).

It probably had a much better budget. Certainly it had a distinguished cast, the cream of Irish acting talent.

And there were far more suitable outdoor locations available, because much of the city had not been altered beyond recognition by developers.

It had an element in common with Rebellion: the political history was the background to storylines about fictitious people. But the fictitious people were more representative of the time and place, and thus more believable.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Strazdas wrote: »

Those are probably valid points but Strumpet City was able to concentrate mainly on characterisation. Ironically it was probably more soap opera like than Rebellion, the very thing that people have been criticising the latter for. Rebellion have had to factor in numerous scenes of the actual Rising into every episode which has hampered their characterisation somewhat. I do agree that some of the dialogue has been jarring : Frances using the F word to May for example, and other 21st century phrases and expressions creeping in.

Using the F word in that context was actually historically accurate. It wasn't used in the "F off" kind of way at the time but was used to refer to sex or the act of sex. So that was fine. Brain washing was used in the same conversation though which we've all since learned was not a term that existed until the 50's or 60's.

Also, did Strumpet City actually cover the rising? Or just the lockout?

TCDStudent1

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Well, it had several advantages over Rebellion, most notably that the book was the result of years of research and writing by James Plunkett, a man who really had his finger on Dublin's pulse (particularly on the Trade Union movement and its history).

It probably had a much better budget. Certainly it had a distinguished cast, the cream of Irish acting talent.

And there were far more suitable outdoor locations available, because much of the city had not been altered beyond recognition by developers.

It had an element in common with Rebellion: the political history was the background to storylines about fictitious people. But the fictitious people were more representative of the time and place, and thus more believable.

I agree with everything you said except for this part. The actors in Rebellion are probably as equally (or even more) distinguished than the Strumpet City cast.

TCDStudent1

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Using the F word in that context was actually historically accurate. It wasn't used in the "F off" kind of way at the time but was used to refer to sex or the act of sex. So that was fine. Brain washing was used in the same conversation though which we've all since learned was not a term that existed until the 50's or 60's.

Also, did Strumpet City actually cover the rising? Or just the lockout?

Just the lockout.

The Rape of Lucretia

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It had an element in common with Rebellion: the political history was the background to storylines about fictitious people. But the fictitious people were more representative of the time and place, and thus more believable.

Have not seen Strump, but is Rebellion not really the more representative - almost stretching things too thin to try to squeeze them all in : the tenement urchins, the Tommy, moneyed, romantic revolutionary, the wee Northern lass with a heart of gold, the northern functionary, the Brit entwined with his Irish bit of fun, the Brit who just wants to get back to civilisation, the good Northerner, etc ?

Strazdas

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Using the F word in that context was actually historically accurate. It wasn't used in the "F off" kind of way at the time but was used to refer to sex or the act of sex. So that was fine. Brain washing was used in the same conversation though which we've all since learned was not a term that existed until the 50's or 60's.

Also, did Strumpet City actually cover the rising? Or just the lockout?

It seemed a bit coarse for the two actual women though, neither of whom appears to be from a rough background. We know that Collins swore like a trooper, but there was the touch of the barrack room about him, he spent most of his time and company with men of his own age.

I think Strumpet City ends in summer 1914 or so with the Bryan Murray character going off to join the War.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Strazdas wrote: »

It seemed a bit coarse for the two actual women though, neither of whom appears to be from a rough background. We know that Collins swore like a trooper, but there was the touch of the barrack room about him, he spent most of his time and company with men of his own age.

Frances saying it though didn't seem too out of character, maybe? It's the kind of think a woman would say if she was really trying to shock/offend someone.

Strazdas

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Frances saying it though didn't seem too out of character, maybe? It's the kind of think a woman would say if she was really trying to shock/offend someone.

Possibly yes but then May repeats it back in severe annoyance. I could probably have done without it, we didn't really need to hear two young women in 1916 using the F word in this context, it was a bit jarring.

KingBrian2

Strazdas wrote: »

Possibly yes but then May repeats it back in severe annoyance. I could probably have done without it, we didn't really need to hear two young women in 1916 using the F word in this context, it was a bit jarring.

My God Strazdas one of the leaders is humiliated in a brutal and cowardly way and you think the F word is offensive. My God I don't believe it.